← All Phrases

“tangible material”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1472,812 judgments

The decision most relied on for tangible material is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on tangible material

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
256 ITR 1 · 2002 · High Court
439
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 based on a mere change of opinion regarding the same material available during the original assessment. Reopening requires fresh, tangible material or information that leads to a reason to believe income has escaped assessment.

CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.
354 ITR 536 · 2013 · High Court
366
citing judgments

Reassessment of income, especially after a summary assessment under Section 143(1), requires the Assessing Officer to possess fresh, tangible material to form a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; a mere reappraisal of existing records or a change of opinion without new material is not permissible.

222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd.
384 ITR 147 · 2016 · High Court
274
citing judgments

An assessment can be reopened if there is tangible material indicating escapement of income, demonstrating a live link between the material and the reasons recorded for reopening. The Assessing Officer must apply their mind to the material facts, and the sanction under section 151 should not be based on borrowed satisfaction.

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.
396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court
272
citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

CIT v. Foramer France
264 ITR 566 · 2003 · Supreme Court
253
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company v. CIT
308 ITR 38 · 2009 · High Court
248
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if the reasons recorded for initiating action under section 148 are not served on the assessee within the limitation period prescribed by section 149. Furthermore, reassessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion without tangible material, particularly when the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of material facts.

Judgments citing tangible material

Kaishar Interiors Private Limtied, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4(2)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly Ground No.16 raised by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5665/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Kukreja &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

Hawala Operators after conducting detailed inquiry/investigation. Information received from the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department through Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), Mumbai constituted sufficient tangible material for initiating reassessment proceedings for forming a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment on account of failure of the Assessee ... also one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entry for bogus purchases. In our view the information/material received by the Assessing Officer constituted sufficient tangible material to initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. The Assessing Officer had reasons to believe that on account of bogus accommodation entries

Ashish Girish Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 42(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5328/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Pradipsinh Saktavat
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Investigation Wing. The aforesaid information contained fresh factual information regarding the activities of the Rajendra Jain Group and Dharmichand Jain Group which constituted tangible material to initiate reassessment proceedings. It is not disputed that statements recorded disclosed that the Rajendra Jain Group and Dharmichand Jain Group concerns were involved ... present case the Assessing Officer had formed the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment on the basis of fresh tangible material being information/material received from the Investigation Wing. Since the reassessment proceedings were initiated within a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment

M/S Jhs Svendgaard Laboratories Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3454/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S Jhs Svendgaard Vs. Dcit Laboratories Ltd. B1/E-23, Central Circle-31, New Mohan Cooperative Delhi Tuhglakabad, Badarpur, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcj5766G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv & Sh. Tarun Chanana, Adv Revenue By Ms.Amisha S. Gupt, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 37

facts in upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act, despite the absence of any fresh tangible material or valid "information" as required under section 148 and Explanation 1 thereto, as the entire reopening was based on a mere borrowed satisfaction and mechanical reproduction ... Assessee with any adverse material. Further, the findings of the AO, affirmed by the CIT(A) was based on suspicion and conjecture without any tangible material showing that the Assessee received any commission or engaged in accommodation transactions. No evidence has been brought on record to demonstrate flow of funds

Naveen Singh, Jamshedpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Jamshedpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 413/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.413/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Naveen Singh………...…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M-9 Old, Adityapur Jamshedpur, Jharkhand- 831013. [Pan: Adkps4229A] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. S. Paul, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 12.09.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017–18 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹43,99,340/- Under Section 139(1) Of The Act. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Accepting The Income As Declared. Subsequently, The Ao Issued A Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act After Recording Reasons & Obtaining Sanction From The Competent Authority. The Assessee Did Not Respond To The Notice Under Section 148. Thereafter, Multiple Notices Under Section 142(1) Were Issued, Including Final Opportunity Notices, Which Were Duly Served But Remained Unanswered.

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

information from DIT (Investigation) that assessee had received accommodation entry but and there was no independent application of mind by Assessing Officer to tangible material and reasons failed to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, reassessment was not justified

Jap Overseas Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward, 10 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7228/MUM/2025[2010 - 11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethjap Overseas Private Vs. Ito Ward, 10(2)(1) Limited Room No. 573, Aayakar Bhawan, B-102, Twinkle Maharishi Karve Road, New Marine Lines, Apartments, New Link Mumbai-400020. Road, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053. Pan/Gir No: Aaacj1573C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

Further in doing so, he drew adverse inference based on incorrect assumption of facts and erred in holding that the ITO was having fresh tangible material for re-opening of the assessment. 2. The Id. CIT(A) erred in dismissing Gr.No. 2 raised before him challenging the action

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 6510/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 30Section 56

closed chapter in the assessment cycle and cannot be reopened or disturbed merely because a search has taken place, unless the search itself yields tangible material revealing undisclosed income pertaining to such completed year. To hold otherwise would render the concept of finality illusory and would effectively convert section 153A

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 6509/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 30Section 56

closed chapter in the assessment cycle and cannot be reopened or disturbed merely because a search has taken place, unless the search itself yields tangible material revealing undisclosed income pertaining to such completed year. To hold otherwise would render the concept of finality illusory and would effectively convert section 153A

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 6507/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

closed chapter in the assessment cycle and cannot be reopened or disturbed merely because a search has taken place, unless the search itself yields tangible material revealing undisclosed income pertaining to such completed year. To hold otherwise would render the concept of finality illusory and would effectively convert section 153A

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 6506/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 4Section 56

closed chapter in the assessment cycle and cannot be reopened or disturbed merely because a search has taken place, unless the search itself yields tangible material revealing undisclosed income pertaining to such completed year. To hold otherwise would render the concept of finality illusory and would effectively convert section 153A

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle - 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 6505/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

closed chapter in the assessment cycle and cannot be reopened or disturbed merely because a search has taken place, unless the search itself yields tangible material revealing undisclosed income pertaining to such completed year. To hold otherwise would render the concept of finality illusory and would effectively convert section 153A

Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 33(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on merits

ITA 3639/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarito Ward-32(2)(1) Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt Kautilya Bhavan, I-1434, Govardhan Nagar Bandra Kurla Bldg. No. 4, Opp. Poinsur Vs. Complex, Bandra (E), Gymkhana, Kandivali Mumbai-400 051 (West), Mumbai-400 067 Pan/Gir No. Aiypb4411G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ketan L. Vajani, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.01.2026

Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

reopening, the CIT(A) held that the original return was processed under section 143(1) and the Assessing Officer was in possession of fresh tangible material received from the Investigation Wing. The CIT(A) observed that at the stage of reopening, the Assessing Officer was only required to form

ACIT-(CC)-7(3), Mumbai vs. Jay Jagannath Steel and Power Limited, Odisha

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 5600/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 69C

amounting to Rs. 1,21,43,554/- . Therefore, such addition was made for unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act was made without any tangible material in possession of Assessing Officer. The assessee company had truly accounted for all inward-outward of goods. The books of accounts were duly audited

Chand Jewellers, Nakodar vs. Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 574/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 574/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chand Jewellers, Bazar Sarafan Vs. Ito-Ward Nakodar, Distt. Jalandhar. Jalandhar. [Pan:-Aahfc5908J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amit Bajaj, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

illegal, void ab initio, and unsustainable in law, as the same were based on mere change of opinion and absence of fresh tangible material, and are thus vitiated. 3. That the addition of Rs. 1,03,83,030/- made under section 69A of the Act and confirmed in appellate proceedings

Pankaj Jindal Contractor, Mansa vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Bathinda

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 695/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 695/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Pankaj Jindal Contractor, Vs. Dcit-Circle-1, Near Vidya Bharti School, Bathinda. Mansa. [Pan:-Aajfp8008L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148aSection 250Section 282Section 40A(3)Section 68

initiated u/s 147/148 of the Act are void ab initio as the proceedings have been initiated on account of change of opinion& further no tangible material came in possession of the AO subsequent to the passing of the original order u/s 143(3) of the Act. 4. That ... years on the same issues which has already been considered and decided in regular assessment, tantamount to change of opinion, in absence of any tangible material being gathered by the AO post assessment u/s 143(3) , and as such the same is bad in law and deserves to be deleted

Adhi Kumara Guru, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-22(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 120/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaमाननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम"

For Appellant: Mr. P.M. Kathir, Advocate for Mr.G.Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

material was already on record. It is thus contended that no new material was already on record. It is thus contended that no new tangible material had come into the possession of the AO prior to tangible material had come into the possession of the AO prior to tangible material ... been, and in substance were, examined during could very well have been, and in substance were, examined during the earlier reassessment proceedings. No new tangible material the earlier reassessment proceedings. No new tangible material the earlier reassessment proceedings. No new tangible material came into the possession of the came into

DCIT, Central Circle-5(4), Mumbai vs. Sunil Bhagwatlal Dalal, Mumbai

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and

ITA 4047/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang&

Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

assessee. 4.5 Before the AO, it was submitted that mere furnishing affidavit before the ITSC, did not and could not be considered as fresh tangible material so as to reopen the case. With respect to this, it is was observed that the AO that Sanjay Chhabria for the first time ... legal validity which is further fortified by the order of the Hon’ble ITSC. Therefore, such affidavit clearly comes under the purview of ‘tangible material’ so as to reopen the assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 4.7 Without prejudice to the above, it was contended that the case

DCIT, Central Circle 5(4), Mumbai vs. Sunil Bhagwatlal Dalal, Mumbai

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and

ITA 4046/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang&

Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

assessee. 4.5 Before the AO, it was submitted that mere furnishing affidavit before the ITSC, did not and could not be considered as fresh tangible material so as to reopen the case. With respect to this, it is was observed that the AO that Sanjay Chhabria for the first time ... legal validity which is further fortified by the order of the Hon’ble ITSC. Therefore, such affidavit clearly comes under the purview of ‘tangible material’ so as to reopen the assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 4.7 Without prejudice to the above, it was contended that the case

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 583/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

ITA No.300&583/Mum/2024 Assessment Year 2012-2013 & 2013-2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI MS. PADMAVATHY

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 300/MUM/2024[2012-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-23
For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

reason also the contention raised by the Assessee cannot be accepted. We are also of the view that the Assessing Officer had sufficient fresh tangible material to form a belief that income liable to tax had escaped assessment. The report of the Investigation Wing, coupled with the material gathered ... verification/inquiry carried out by the Assessing Officer constituted sufficient tangible material to initiate reassessment proceedings in the case of the Assessee. In the present case the return of income was filed by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2012-2013 was processed under Section

Maithan Ceramic Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle 7(1), Kolkata

ITA 1944/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Himmatsinghka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 269S

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT